User talk:Decent pictures

December 2015
Hello, I'm Boing! said Zebedee. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Chiaroscuro without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I have restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Chiaroscuro, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Chiaroscuro. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. /wia  /tlk  23:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi. Can I give you a word of advice (and warning) here? You have tried to make changes to a Wikipedia article, but you have been reverted by two other users so far. Wikipedia works by consensus, so when you are reverted multiple times by different people, that means you don't currently have a consensus for your change. So what you need to do is start a discussion on the article talk page, and see if you can get a consensus supporting you - and until you do, *do not* repeat your changes again. What you are doing in constantly removing those pictures is called edit warring and it will get you blocked if you continue it, and I wouldn't like that to happen to you. So please have a read of WP:EW and WP:Consensus, and start that discussion at the Talk:Chiaroscuro page. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:32, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes hello. I suppose you're pretty good at this game. Do those photos add to your understanding of chiaroscuro? No one is thinking about chiaroscuro when they see those photos. Please take them off the Web yourself. Can I give you a word of advice (and warning) here? Your own kids are going to find this content on the Web when they browse. How does that make you feel? Perhaps you don't care. You need to take that responsibility more seriously. --Decent pictures
 * That is an argument you will need to make on the article talk page, not here - I have no more right to unilaterally change Wikipedia image policy than you do. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:07, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Who said anything about changing their image policy? I'm talking about making educational sites decent for our children. It's important. Your gallery is not benefiting from those photos and neither are the students who are learning about Chiaroscuro. --Decent pictures
 * We have enough junk on our Web. Please make an effort to provide better quality. --Decent pictures
 * Before I go, why is it so important to you to include those erotic images? --Decent pictures
 * The relevant policy is at WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:CONSENSUS, and every time this kind of thing has come up for discussion that I've seen, the consensus has been to keep the images. I reverted your removals simply because you were removing content without explanation - read all of my messages on this page and you will find no opinion on the images themselves, as I have offered none. Now that you have made your purpose clear, I have tried to explain the process you need to follow (one of simple discussion) if you want those images removed. Whether you choose to listen is up to you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If you think there are better examples of the chiaroscuro technique in photography that are suitably licensed for use on Wikipedia, then that would certainly be relevant to the discussion about possibly removing the existing nude photographs. However, as Boing! said Zebedee noted, Wikipedia is not censored. We typically don't remove photographs merely because one might find it potentially objectionable. I invite you to read the WP:NOTCENSORED policy and to contribute to the discussion at Talk:Chiaroscuro if you would like to discuss the photographs further. Thanks, /wia   /tlk  15:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)